Should the Guess Who be in the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame?

With all due respect, the first paragraph of your initial post would not lead me to believe you are a Guess Who fan..just sayin'.

That being said, I understand what you mean regarding people thinking that like = great, and blindly defending their musical heroes. I also have some groups that I admire that I can understand will never be RRHOF inductees or even critical darlings. For instance, I really have grown to love Spanky & Our Gang...personally, I think that "Like to Get to Know You" (the song) is one of the best singles of the 60s....but I have no real illusions of them ever creeping up to the level of mainstream consciousness. And that's fine with me.

And as I stated earlier, The Guess Who has had a muddy legacy since breaking up in 1975....you probably know what I mean. If you are familiar with their story, it is amazing how they persevered over the years before making it big...the failed trip to England...being a house band on Canadian TV..and this is all before Wheatfield Soul! From there... 13 top 40 hits, including 6 top 10s, etc, etc.

But I digress. As Michael Nesmith so eloquently stated regarding the RRHOF..."I can see the HOF (Hall of Fame) is a private enterprise. It seems to operate as a business, and the inductees are there by some action of the owners of the Enterprise. The inductees appear to be chosen at the owner's pleasure. This seems proper to me. It is their business in any case. It does not seem to me that the HOF carries a public mandate, nor should it be compelled to conform to one."

I truly doubt anything that is said on this thread - or any other regarding HOF worthiness of any band - will resonate with anyone with any power regarding the induction of The Guess Who. I am simply stating my opinion.

NJB

PS: The Love thread is quite good. Thanks for starting it.

 

harry shearer and is that lenny or squiggy? cool find!

I don't think ive listened to Guess Who on purpose ever....I had their road food (cool cover) and greatest hits album at some point but not sure I ever played them. but I know 5-6 songs so thats something (I mean I like joan jett and I only know one of hers and she didnt even write it, and she got her pass) . I did have BTO II when I was 12, I was takin care of bidness at a young age. I don't know, I say let those cannucks in. These Eyes is pretty great anyway

 

It's so cute that people try to make their point by first alienating their audience.

The case you're making is, you know who they are, but the unwashed masses don't, therefore they are not worthy...of being among artists who are celebrated for essentially the same thing: the public deserving to know more about them, but don't. But, people come to the Hall, look at what's there, and learn what they don't know.

That's why there's a big display about somebody big, like, I dunno, Prince. And not 20 feet away, is a section about somebody like Les Paul. So, Les Paul doesn't deserve to be there, because, maybe you in all your lofty glory know the significance of this guy...but the lowly public doesn't, so they don't deserve to discover more of their heritage? Or, what "The Day The Music Died" was about? Or Alan Freed? George Martin? The "Bo Diddley Beat"?

Yez gotcha some pretty weak logic thar.

 

Well if The Cars can get inducted......

 

Always one in every crowd.This isnt a spelling beeeeeeeeeeeee.

 

Having read Mike's almost unreadable book, it's clear he's on a different wavelength than me and many about R+R and music in general. He's right - it is a private enterprise. But they should be more upfront about that because there's a pretense that it is an 'official' institution about a music genre. That's another thread...

That said, we all have our own personal RRHOF's and the Guess who were inducted fairly early into mine. (I had a nice festive tray of vegetables and dip, and a make-your-own-taco bar - with moosemeat. I thought they would like that. Kale said he would show up, but didn't. Gary showed, demonstrated the drumming pattern "No Time" with two celery sticks then took off. Wouldn't you know it Bachmann and Cummings never even got back to me.)

 

That's a great point and I really hope that music fans get into groups like The Guess Who and learn by going to the RRHOF, but we fans are 1 vote of the Hall meanwhile they have many insiders who know all of the music artists in rock and The Guess Who can't seem to get on the ballot. The people of the industry along with the fans don't believe they are good enough. It's understandable if people want to see a group they like make the Hall, but at a certain point, a fan has to think not only with their heart to determine something like this. It's not just the lack of fame but the lack of longevity in quality. Bands with a short period of fame really need to make an impact in influence and innovation as well as have incredible quality. They have a true classic in "American Woman" but no classic album. The OP himself used an anthology over any one album for his argument.

The fan that goes exploring will not just use the RRHOF to find out all the great artifacts of rock archeology. A fan that really wants to learn will use as many sources to discover and I really hope they find The Guess Who. They will learn that a RRHOF is not everything in life.

 

This is part of the point when boomer narcissism doesn't quite reconcile with Classic Rock mediocrity (The Guess Who Steppenwolf, Mountain, Grand Funk, etc.)

 

I would personally place the Guess Who several rungs of the ladder higher than Steppenwolf, Mountain, or Grand Funk, mainly because of the songwriting. The latter three are for the most part (IMHO) pretty run of the mill hard rock acts.

 

Yes. If Percy Sledge is the measuring stick then 'yes', without a doubt.

 

I would still argue that the HOF's supposed "weakest member" shouldn't be the bar another artist needs to cross.

That concept allows the HOF no "errors"...

 

Well, there is also Joan Jett and Donna Summer.

 

19 songs in the top 40 6 of them in the top 10 and 1 no. 1, Don't know if chart success is part of the criteria but I believe they should be in. They cranked out a lot of hits in the late 69's early 70s

 

This misses the point. It's not a very compelling argument when you say "Well, look at these other jokers they let in. . ." rather than making a more proactive case on the band's strengths.

 

They seem pretty bland to be in the HOF but that's just opinion

 

No doubt the GW had a nice run - albeit a pretty short one in the US, as the vast majority of their success spanned a couple of years.

Chart success does matter in terms of (most) HOF inductees, but it's not the only criteria.

Herman's Hermits' chart run trounces that of the GW, and I don't think they've ever even been nominated.

And then there's SHF faves the Monkees, another super-successful band with no HOF love.

This leaves out "genre questionable" artists like Whitney Houston and Mariah Carey who've had way more chart success, too.

I think we can find plenty of non-inductees who've sold skillions of records..

 

That's been my point. If your argument is "they're at least as good as the weakest inductee", I think you're on shaky ground...

 

You missed my point, I was referring to Oatsdad comment about Percy Sledge being the "weakest member". Although, I do agree with your rational thinking of not using "weaker members" to elevate other musicians or bands that are not in.

 

At the least Randy Bachman should be in as a charter member of both the Guess Who and BTO...

 

Is that an example of two wrongs making a right?

I kid, I kid!

 

I think I've been down this road with you before, haven't I?

 

I voted no, to help maintain their credibility.

Who needs the hall of fame to tell us what’s great?

It’s a load of corporate rubbish...have no truck with it.

 

Fair argument, but an institution (which, practically by its' existence, is anathema for such a topic as 'revolutionary, progressing societal change via art'; by that alone, one could probably make an even better case that the RHOF itself shouldn't be allowed to exist, but I'm sure that's been discussed here ad nauseum) dedicated to holding up various artists above others as significant, to my mind should especially recognize such a group on that alone: the public assumes they're not significant, and those in charge absolutely should know better. And again, "American Woman" the song aside, various "whiffs" at the bat making this album or that album not quite the classic in some person's eyes, that's not their major contribution: they broke Canada onto the world stage; they put a whole country on the musical map.

So, yes; if for some reason the public has failed to see that, who else but an organization like the RHOF has the "responsibility" to correct that status in the public eye. Whatever else is their reason to exist!

I saw three films this year that "corrected" the public's ignorance of history. In each of the three instances, these are films about incidents in war-torn areas that were never a known to the outside world, until either the films' release, or the book or books they were based upon. Each of these contribute to our understanding of our world and our heritage, and as little as five years ago, we would have never known. Now, who's to say this is Cinema's "responsibility" to unleash these stories on the world?
Nobody. But it's simply what Cinema can do, and often does. Because telling engaging stories is what the medium is there for. When an institution is created with a stated purpose, where is its' own sense of worth, when the people who run it, don't even recognize opportunities to serve in its' own capacity? (Point further developed next post...)

 

Well...which is it, then? You assume they maintain credibility...while at the same time, labeling it, "corporate rubbish."

The answer is in your next sentence: "Who needs the hall of fame to tell us what's great?"

Well, we can debate that until our bandwidth withers up and dies, but that's kinda what they set themselves up as being responsible for, isn't it?

I say, how well they do their work, depends on the face they wish to show to the world. An example: you may not be aware of this, but in the '70s, our ABC television network got jealous. CBS had the Tonys, NBC had the Oscars, CBS had the Grammys, NBC had the Emmys...and ABC had, The Love Boat. So, they cooked up a scheme with Dick Clark (that guy who "owned" their noon hour on Saturday mornings), to manufacture some awards shows. Lo and behond: The Peoples Choice Awards, The American Music Awards, The American Movie ("Film"?) Awards, etc. Guaranteed ratings-getters, because every 5 minutes or so, you're seeing somebody you love on the screen. No gaffers-of-the-year, no out-of-touch geezers reading teleprompters, no industry-honors-its'-own crap, just what the public said they liked. Top sellers. Top box office. Highest ratings.

Essentially, a prestigous award bestowed...purely for market share. Sooo...as if winning the high spot on the charts, making the most money or grossing the best numbers wasn't enough, now Paul Simon gets another bullsh*t award for doing it. And "they" didn't actually have to do anything - the celebrity gets the award because the public bought their product! Wow, huzzah guys, what a accomplishment! And Dick Clark made no bones about it (just as he did every Saturday Morning, on the same network who had exclusive rights to these fake-award shows): along with the status for being Class President, Homecoming Queen or Head Cheerleader...you also get an award for it! And nobody will dispute the winners...because they voted for them in the first place.

What the hell does this have to do with the Rock Hall of Fame? Well, this is Jann Wenner's version of talking crebibility like The Grammys, but operating in the "most popular wins" mentality of The American Music Awards. The only difference is, the actual public doesn't have all that much of a say in who gets Hall-of-Fame'd, and the judges are essentially the Mean Girls Sorority.

"Who need the hall of fame to tell us what's great?"

The Hall of Fame does.

Shouldn't be that way unless they can back that up with some credibility...but that's okay, so long as they don't choose anybody who...I dunno...deserves the award...?